Looks like we have a race for the presidency after all. The Mitt Romney campaign, which had seemed dead in the water, was invigorated and his supporters electrified by his powerful performance during Wednesday’s first presidential debate. On the other hand, President Barack Obama, who has put being president on the back burner in recent weeks while campaigning, now surely knows that he is in the fight of his political life.

Romney’s debating skills were honed in the course of this year’s GOP Primary season, and he put that experience to good use on Wednesday. He was articulate, direct, detailed and energetic in his responses, most of which the incumbent was not. Moreover, Romney looked and sounded more presidential than did the actual president.

Obama for once didn’t cite his predecessor George W. Bush by name, but repeatedly lamented the “mess” he had inherited. And he accused Romney of wanting to “double down” on the policies that caused that “mess.” The fact is, though, that Obama’s policies have made that “mess” worse, not better, as Romney hammered home on Wednesday.

Obama claimed repeatedly that Romney’s plan to cut all tax rates by 20 percent would cost $5 trillion, help the wealthy and hurt the middle class. Romney refused to let the allegations go unchallenged.

“Virtually everything he just said about my tax plan is inaccurate,” he said at one point, adding at another, “Mr. President, you’re entitled to your own airplane and your own house, but not your own facts.”

The incumbent often looked like he was not enjoying himself, much the same way that President George H.W. Bush seemed to be wishing he was somewhere else at times during the 1992 presidential debates. And at one point, rather than continue to try explaining his economic plans, Obama plaintively suggested to moderator Jim Lehrer that they move on to a different topic.

Obama on Wednesday paid a heavy price for having spent the past four years avoiding adversarial questions and holding press conferences only infrequently, and then only with the reverential White House press corps. He appeared unprepared and unenthusiastic about defending his record. Rusty, if you will, despite his intensive preparation for the debate. Obama’s “debate prep” stand-in for Romney was the wooden John Kerry. Obama learned the hard way that Romney is no Kerry clone. And Obama’s “soaring oratory” was nowhere to be found without his Tele-prompter.

For Romney, it was an overdue chance to present himself and his agenda to the public — and especially to the independents — in his own words. Till now, he has let himself be defined in large part by Obama’s caustic Chicago-style political ads and by the deep-in-the-tank pro-Obama mainstream media. But the public finally got a look at Mitt Romney, unfiltered, on Wednesday. And early indications are that it liked what it heard and saw — a lot.

Romney’s debate performance transformed the dynamics of the race. You can expect a more aggressive Obama to show up at their next debates. Yet we suspect that Romney will be more than equal to that Obama as well.

Unfiltered, we got to watch Romney lie through his teeth regarding his stated positions on taxes, and healthcare, education and a host of other issues to the point that only the uninformed, those who are unfamiliar with policies he HAD been advocating for more than a year, could have watched without being taken aback by his deceitful remarks.

My goodness! Instead of a thought provoking discussion on the debate, the liberals are back to name-calling and blaming who ever they can for their candidate's poor showing. Could it be that Mr. Obama was finally confronted with the failures of his administration and after being coddled by the mainstream press, he didn't know how to respond?

Despite the diatribe of ads badmouthing Mr Romney, you should look at his track record while governing Mass. and in saving the Salt Lake City Olympics. But for some odd reason, track records don't matter to some people--you did after all elect a junior senator who spent more time stomping for votes than tending to the business of our country.

Delvin, if you hadn't fallen asleep in your rocking chair again you might have read where I said I would be voting for the Libertarian, whoever it is.

Devlin Adams

|

October 08, 2012

Doesn't make any difference, VFP42, it's still a vote for Obama.

VFP42

|

October 10, 2012

I am not sure how a vote for a Libertarian is a vote for Obama or Romney. A vote for Romney is a vote for Obama, and a vote for Obama is a vote for Romney, but a vote for neither is something different.

The only voting that matters anymore is voting against the two parties that have controlled us for 200 years.

Unfiltered?

|

October 05, 2012

The public got an unfiltered look at Romney a few weeks ago when his 47% remark was released.

*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides